Are We Missing the Mark? The Implementation of Community Based Participatory Education in Cancer Disparities Curriculum Development

Abstract

Objective The Chicago south side, even more so than national populations, continues to be burdened with widening gaps of disparities in cancer outcomes. Therefore, Chicago community members were engaged in addressing the following content areas for a cancer disparities curriculum: (1) the south side Chicago community interest in participating in curriculum design, (2) how community members should be involved in designing cancer disparities curriculum, and (3) what community members believe the curriculum should address to positively impact their community. Methods Eighty-six community members from 19 different zip code areas of Chicago attended the deliberative session. A survey composed of three quantitative and three short-answer content questions was analyzed. Results The majority of participants were from the south side of Chicago (62 %) and females (86 %). Most, 94 %, believed community members should be involved in cancer disparities curriculum development. Moreover, 56 % wanted to be involved in designing the curriculum, and 61 % reported an interest in taking a course in cancer disparities. Three categorical themes were derived from the qualitative questions: (1) community empowerment through disparities education—“a prescription for change,” (2) student skill development in community engagement and advocacy training, and (3) community expression of shared experiences in cancer health disparities. Conclusion The community provided valuable input for cur-ricular content and has an interest in collaborating on cancer disparities curriculum design. Community participation must be galvanized to improve disparities curricular development and delivery to successfully address the challenges of eliminating disparities in health.

Role of active patient involvement in undergraduate medical education: a systematic review

“… 39 Patients assessed mostly non-cognitive domains of student performance. 35 46 Medical educators interviewed by Jha et al believed there was a role for patients in assessing whether students made them feel at ease and whether students asked the right questions. 66 While patients and medical educators in the study by Raj et al 54 praised patients’ assessments, students expressed their concerns whether patients could reliably assess clinical skills or whether they were likely to be too lenient.…”

“…Community members were motivated to participate in curriculum development. 35 While they were not seen as medical experts, they did have an interest in ensuring optimal healthcare for themselves and their families. 26 …”

“…Rationale for involving patients in medical education Several authors referred to government policy mandating patient participation in medical education, namely the UK Department of Health and the UK General Medical Council, 16 23 24 the Australian Medical Council 25 and the WHO 5 as a rationale for their patient involvement initiatives. Besides these political drivers, cited rationales were: to teach students patient-centred and interprofessional care 24 26-28 ; to introduce students to chronic illness care [29][30][31] ; to create a multicultural learning environment; to practise social accountability and an inclusion agenda [32][33][34][35][36][37] ; to make education more engaging, powerful and transformative 38 ; and to empower patients. 39 Patients mentioned that they felt a sense of responsibility to the broader community in shaping the future health workforce 24 32 and improving the healthcare system.…”

“…54 Patient role in curriculum development Community members were motivated to participate in curriculum development. 35 While they were not seen as medical experts, they did have an interest in ensuring optimal healthcare for themselves and their families. 26 Community members actively participated in the planning, implementation and evaluation of the educational programme.…”

“…36 Minority community members provided input on curricular design, especially on the content of the cancer disparities curriculum. 35 Beyond the disease or competency-specific courses, patients were involved in consultative meetings with stakeholders to identify desirable attributes, competencies of graduates and development of a community-based learning environment. 45 Patients were also consulted on the desired characteristics of the curriculum.…”